Comments by "SeanBZA" (@SeanBZA) on "Thunderf00t" channel.

@mr2miach Thing is car body kits are not run under much strain, as they flex a lot, so the attachment points have to penetrate the material so it is held in place mechanically, as the glue join will flex, and eventually pull the fibres off at the surface. Here the issue is the join has to be orders of magnitude stronger, and any penetrations for bolts would have resulted in massive stress concentrations on the fibre area around them, making them fail quickly. Car body kit you will see crazing of the paint surface before the fibres themselves are compromised, so you are running it under low strain, but here it is run close to the full pressure rating, with little margin for any error, and cycling will slowly degrade the bonding to the point of failure.
1
@mr2miach No, car body is designed to flex, with bolts to contain it, this submarine was just a poor design with no way to safely indicate it was about to fail. The testing they put in to tell it was under strain was always going to respond too slowly to prevent the implosion, as the warning came with only a few minutes of time left, when the hull stopped creaking, as all the spare tension in it was left, and the delamination was going to occur as soon as a single fibre brook loose next from the matrix, releasing all the pent up energy in the matrix nearly immediately.
1
That first set of shuttle tests did have one thing that made the pilots happy, they had Martin Baker as company, so they had at least some way to handle things going pear shaped. Removed later as it made things complex, then the last safety device was to hope you got low enough, in one piece, to use a carbon fibre rail to get out past the wing and use a parachute.
1
Why do you need so many rockets? Simple, making big rocket engines is hard, and making big rocket engines that are reliable is harder, and making big rocket engines that are reliable, and restartable, is an order of magnitude harder. So you make a smaller engine that is reasonably reliable, that you can be sure will restart, and where the smaller size ensures that you do not get too much instability in response. Plus you get the ability to have a wide thrust range, because big rocket engines only have 2 thrust settings, off - no thrust, or on, with a small range of adjustment in pressure available. Small engines you can get wider thrust changes without it stopping, though even there you will only have a 10-20% range of control of thrust, but if you have a few you can just use more of them. That bit of rocket science came from the 1960's, when NASA destroyed a good number of engines and test stands making big ones that did not blow up after 30 seconds. The USSR had an engine that worked, so simply went with the put many approach, as they saw the difficulty of making a big one, and wanted to get something that worked first. That the rest was built from substandard parts was the problem.
1
Drill a hole in the rear wall that us less than a quarter wavelength diameter, and then use some polythene wrap held down by a few lengths of Halbach array magnet ( fridge door seal) as a splash guard that is invisible to IR for the thermal camera. For the other visible light camera simply stick a small square of regular glass to the outside with silicone, also for splash protection for the camera. The rear steel is typically so thin you can do the holes with a regular 20mm conduit saw, and then use a bit of 120 grit sandpaper on a small sanding block to deburr the holes, and then if you want a quick application of appliance white spray paint to cover the bare steel edges.
1
So long as he still has a single share he still has stock. So he is out what $1 at the end.
1
Cheaper than the cybertruck is to buy an actual bullet proof vehicle, which will come in cheaper, and also comes with run flat wheels, and bullet proof glass.
1
@kapa1611 Once he sells a few trucks the bus will be a natural evolution, as it is just a car with the AI and a lot bigger battery pack on it. The Tesla motor units are strong and powerful enough to, with minor changes to the reduction gearing, move a 10 ton bus around easily, as it basically is going to be 3 cars worth of battery pack. Plus supercharge at every terminus, with an automatic connector and AI to align the vehicle in a defined spot, and another AI with vision to attach, and in the 5-10 minutes you are at a stop you can get a decent charge on the unit. Buses rarely do more than 400km in an inner city route a day, and if you are doing a loop around to a suburban hub you can simply spend 15 minutes there to get a charge boost to cover going 800km a day. Battery life will be shorter, but still long enough, and the old ones can easily get recycled or converted to static use.
1
Thanks for reminding me I actually do have a Twitter account.......
1
So basically a very overhyped and overpriced emulation of what happens if I accidentally touch a stainless steel fork to my silver amalgam fillings.
1
Wonder where Stoddy gets his elective surgery done, that hairline and eyes seems to have moved up to near the back of his head......
1
Yes working fusion is always 40 years away, and has been that way for the last 60 odd years as well. fission, the unwanted step child, is however the safest power source on the planet, given the megawatt hours per fatality or debilitating injury standard. More people die every year, stepping from their house to the outside, than those killed by fission power plant accidents.
1
Wonder if mister egg popper knows the FCC allowable radiation of his microwave is around ten times that maximum output power of his fondleslab?
1
You would need lower voltages if you had damp hands, which lowers the skin resistance down from around 100k to around 5k, depending on the amount of salt on your skin.
1